If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

In the real world, I care about animal rights. When there are no rules protecting animals, animals are horribly abused. In the pokemon world, there are few if any rules protecting them. My fanfiction is mainly about that point.

Yes, because the cops just let criminals do as they please and incidents of trainers blasting their disobedient Pokemon's heads off with M-16 assault rifles are an hourly occurrence in the Pokemon world :/

And BTW, I eat between 5 and 10 hamburgers a day. Interpret that how you will.

And believe me, most wild animals seem to like being preyed upon over captivity.

Wow, wild animals must be more emo than I thought. Maybe its suicide negotiators and psychologists and Zoloft that the Pokemon world really needs!

The battling issue is an interesting one, but missing a crucial point - pokemon in the wild aren't battling constantly. It's not the simply the difference between being healed or not healed.

And in the wild, there's nobody to throw in the towel or forfeit. Just like with wild animals, battles are either for SURVIVAL or for SUPREMACY OF THEIR HERD. When these issues come into play, a wild creature is not going to stop an assault simply because its foe is unconscious. They will continue until the target has suffered critical injury (in a battle for leadership) or is DEAD. This can happen whether the creature gets in one duel a day or 56.

And really, superiority isn't the issue.

Evice, Greevil, Ardos, and the rest of the Cipher Admins would like to argue this point. And seriously, I'm now starting to think maybe Shadow Pokemon aren't such a bad idea. Yes, I'm evil; deal.

The poultry industry has developed a method of preventing hens from pecking each other. It involves searing off their beaks.

Meanwhile, to avoid any injuries to breeding sows, they've kept in complete isolation their entire lives in pens too narrow to turn around in.

Inexplicably, people sometimes argue that maybe, this is not necessarily the nicest thing we've ever done for the little dears.

Do you have a solution that does not involve everyone in the known universe going vegan? If so, share with the industry!

I'm quite sure there are some pokemon that like battling, as there are some people who, say, like boxing. I'm equally sure that there are others don't like battling, and that if they wanted to be caught, they wouldn't be desperately fighting to not be caught. I'd also believe some pokemon might, just possibly, value things like "basic freedom" or "family" or perhaps "not getting beaten up all day".
Simple game: If you were in their position, what would you want?

I can take prison on. Name the time, number of years, and correctional facility. Try to make it maximum security if you can. I like a challenge.

...okay. You did notice none of Lucki's pokemon wanted to kill her, right? And that there were no rants in the story? Or that the crux of the issue was that Lucki wasn't evil, just self-centered? No?

Not this one, since it was not written as such (After all, that would have given your charade away), but I have seen plenty of one-shots that completely shove this down the reader's throat. And yes, those fics do annoy me to no end.

Sure! I'm really tired of the exaggerated ones where the trainer is just running around trying to be evil.

I'm talking about the ones where the trainer is actually nice, but the Pokemon is too stubborn/emo/stupid to realize it.

I'm talking about a parody where the Pokemon rejects capture, goes back to be abused by its pack-leader, gets sent out alone, gets mauled by a bigger Pokemon, then in the afterlife sees another one of its fellow species living it up with its trainer at the Hilton (and earning rewards points AND frequent flyer miles, I might add) and goes, "OH SNAPZ THIS IS WHAT I MISSED OUT ON?"

And yes, I primarily see things through the TRAINER'S POV. Weird, huh?

At any rate, the message of this to the real well written trainer fics is simply to consider the existence of things that aren't convenient.

So, you tryin' to imply my fic sucks, since it was an obvious target of this whole thing? Meh, doesn't really matter to me; my harsh reviews have garnered me plenty of enemies here. One more made by arguing a point ain't gonna send me cryin' home to mommy.

And BTW, in my fic, except for that Nidorino early on, ALL of my Pokemon like to battle. You can't really argue against it since they willingly battle and they don't voice complaints (they don't talk), and they don't rebel. Now, I could put in some attempted capture where the Pokemon doesn't want to go along, to satisfy you, but that would just be tacked on.

Don't define the world around your character's view alone. Let other characters have separate identities and goals. If you don't want to deal with pokemon that don't want to be trained, actually ask them, and actually release ones who refuse instead of saying the trainer knows better. Consider that pokemon, especially intelligent speaking ones, have lives of their own and might have other things they want to do.

How do you deal with bred/gift Pokemon, since several of mine fall under that category? Even if they have some natural instinct to go back into the wild, they do not have the experience or the wild training to survive in such an environment. Which is the more cruel choice there, captivity, or releasing it into an environment it was never accustomed to?

So, much as I like a good debate, I'm going to end it here to avoid a flame war.

Yes, because the cops just let criminals do as they please and incidents of trainers blasting their disobedient Pokemon's heads off with M-16 assault rifles are an hourly occurrence in the Pokemon world :/

To reiterate, it is absurd for you to accuse me of extreme beliefs when you're reduced to using hyperbole to do so.

Wow, wild animals must be more emo than I thought. Maybe its suicide negotiators and psychologists and Zoloft that the Pokemon world really needs!

No, some creatures just don't like being confined in near isolation for their entire lives.

Animals really are a bit smarter than people often give them credit for. And it's quite easy to test them for things like stress hormones, or to note captive animals in small cages start behaving abnormally or even injuring themselves, or that, while they don't die of starvation, they also are often sickly or suffer from what's scientifically termed "failure to thrive", and don't live out a maximum lifespan either. This varies depending, of course, on animal (unsocial ones with low intelligence tend to not care about their surroundings) and care.

And in the wild, there's nobody to throw in the towel or forfeit. Just like with wild animals, battles are either for SURVIVAL or for SUPREMACY OF THEIR HERD. When these issues come into play, a wild creature is not going to stop an assault simply because its foe is unconscious. They will continue until the target has suffered critical injury (in a battle for leadership) or is DEAD. This can happen whether the creature gets in one duel a day or 56.

Actually, battles are rarely for survival and your trite bit about herds outright laughable. Most fatal wild animal "battles" are a large animal eating a smaller one. Most interspecies competition (SUPREMACY OF THEIR HERD!!!) is, in fact, nonfatal and often accomplished without any injures at all, and many SURVIVAL!!! "battles" are nonfatal competition over food or territory. Many animals also have a behavioral equivalent of throwing in the towel, as well - dogs, for example, roll over to expose their stomachs - or will simply flee. (And virtually no animal on the face of the entire planet fights to the death over "leadership". Research. It won't hurt you.) Animals don't spend all their time ripping each other apart. Assume for a moment I might actually have some knowledge of biology, ecology and animal behavior.

You don't seem to understand what I meant, possibly because you know nothing on the subject. Animals in the wild don't spend a lot of time fighting each other. As to if an individual pokemon would rather face near constant fighting, but have a very low chance of death, or occasional fighting with a higher chance of death, it would depend on temperament and species - a short-lived prey species would probably not mind the tradeoff, while those that tend to have longer, calmer lives would.

Additionally, you're making the same mistake a lot of people make, addressed by Raiden. Battling is painful. I would not want to be injured repeatedly even if the injuries were not permanent because it's going to hurt. Some pokemon might not mind, but "it's fixed later" doesn't mean it didn't happen in the first place.

Evice, Greevil, Ardos, and the rest of the Cipher Admins would like to argue this point. And seriously, I'm now starting to think maybe Shadow Pokemon aren't such a bad idea. Yes, I'm evil; deal.

The bad guys would argue that superiority does allow you to abuse others? Okay. And you're saying this is a rebuttal to my point how...?

Do you have a solution that does not involve everyone in the known universe going vegan? If so, share with the industry!

Actually, I was not making any statement about eating meat, merely addressing the idea that a "method" of doing something is inherently more humane than the alternative. At any rate, the "solution" is to not pack the animals into tight spaces, which is already perfectly well known. The reason the bird's beaks - which, for the record, are not like your nails but more like your hands in terms of sensitivity - are seared off is because the birds here are kept in lots with about the space of a piece of paper per bird, to maximize profit-per-area. They wouldn't be pecking each other to death if they weren't literally packed from wall to wall. Similarly, there is no reason why the sows, which are intelligent, social animals, need to be kept in total isolation their entire lives.

This happens because it is marginally cheaper to keep them in far more brutal confinement and it is not illegal, not because it is in any way necessary.

Regulated "methods" may be better than a theoretical alternative, but that doesn't mean they're automatically good in and of themselves. Don't argue something is good simply because it's regulated.

I can take prison on. Name the time, number of years, and correctional facility. Try to make it maximum security if you can. I like a challenge.

I must at this point ask if you are actually reading what I said, since this appears staggeringly irrelevant to the question.

Not this one, since it was not written as such (After all, that would have given your charade away), but I have seen plenty of one-shots that completely shove this down the reader's throat. And yes, those fics do annoy me to no end.

I'm deeply sorry. Unfortunately, some readers are very stupid, and if I do not make myself clear, will start to ascribe patently ridiculous opinions to me, like the idea occasional abuse refers to trainers running around with assault rifles.

I'm talking about the ones where the trainer is actually nice, but the Pokemon is too stubborn/emo/stupid to realize it.

Ah! Idiotic behavior that will make no contextual sense, because you have no reason for why they would behave that way, but are doing so solely to get back at someone who holds different opinions and who has angered you, and additionally is done without the benefit of any knowledge of actual behavior, either animal or human. Yes, that's most definitely a good way to get back at me. I really do hate badfic. You could throw in some misspellings too.

And yes, I primarily see things through the TRAINER'S POV. Weird, huh?

Or, oddly, perhaps something I'm well aware of and that is a significant reason for why I try to write about things from a different POV than everyone else.

So, you tryin' to imply my fic sucks, since it was an obvious target of this whole thing?

AHAHAHAHA you're special really.

Yes. I spent an entire year writing a story just to target YOU. Because YOU are such an awesome writer. Really. Even though there was no evidence I was even aware of you until midway through, I was TOTALLY seething about your story. Because you are just SO AWESOME.

I'm just jealous, in fact, of your awesome writing. I most definitely did not leave references to the real inspirations of this scattered throughout like flameworthy easter eggs, nor do I normally avoid this forum and only read stories on FFN, because that would mean the inspiration was only from stories posted there rather than your story, which, as you've stated, is clearly not true.

In fact, I was so aiming at your story, I used my time machine to go back in time and begin posting this two months before you.

Oh yes. "Harsh". That is definitely the word for it. I will cease my attempts to force you to stop (which I was totally trying to do) for I couldn't possibly hope to go against one who has enemies from her harsh reviews, something so very foreign to my experience.

And BTW, in my fic, except for that Nidorino early on, ALL of my Pokemon like to battle. You can't really argue against it since they willingly battle and they don't voice complaints (they don't talk), and they don't rebel. Now, I could put in some attempted capture where the Pokemon doesn't want to go along, to satisfy you, but that would just be tacked on.

1) You are so right that my story solely revolves around yours and are not being stupid or an egomaniac at all.
2) Yes, exactly My point wasn't that pokemon wouldn't willingly battle or that having those pokemon exist is wrong. It was that trying to avoid the issue by making all pokemon want to battle despite the fact that, statistically, there should be plenty that don't, is a common mistake of convenience in OT fanfiction, where things simply work out nicely for the protagonist.

How do you deal with bred/gift Pokemon, since several of mine fall under that category? Even if they have some natural instinct to go back into the wild, they do not have the experience or the wild training to survive in such an environment. Which is the more cruel choice there, captivity, or releasing it into an environment it was never accustomed to?

By not assuming it's an either/or situation.

Wild animals raised as pets cannot be put back into the wild. It's even more impossible for domestic animals. You've made them so they can't live on their own, and you now have a responsibility to care for them.

That said, using the fact you have to take care of them and that they cannot survive on their own as justification for being able to do whatever you want with them is wrong. A pet cougar cannot be returned to the wild. This does not mean that the man who decided to keep it in his small apartment was not doing something wrong. Similarly, that a pug should be kept as a pet and not abandoned in the wild does not mean it was okay to keep a young pug around as a chew toy for a larger, more aggressive dog.

Captivity is not a catch-all term. Confining an animal in a small cage is obviously different than confining them in a large park. This isn't a simplistic right/wrong, captivity/freedom bit. If you'd take a few breaths, consider that Lucki's pokemon serve to explain the facets of the situation.

Silver is a bred pokemon who is socialized with humans and is frightened by battles. She's also a newly hatched infant. She'd like being someone's pet, especially if there were other squirtle for her to be friends with, and wouldn't mind being a contest pokemon. However, with Lucki she's been forced into situations she doesn't want, and is trapped because, by nature of her bred status, she can't leave. Even if she could run away or demand release, she has nowhere to go. In the end, Silver has had a breakdown, is clear that she is only there because she can't leave, and Lucki sends her out again. Lucki didn't create the situation Silver is in, but she took advantage of it rather than caring about Silver.

Flare has absolutely no problem with battles. He's also socialized with humans. Lucki is neglectful and emotionally abusive of him. The problem is how she treats him, not the basic situation. He would have been happy belonging to someone like the Team Magma boy, who actually wants him and would pay attention to him. Flare doesn't simply run off. He leaves for another trainer who will treat him differently.

Raiden is a child. He belongs with his family, who have been left without knowing if he's even alive, and although he doesn't mind battling itself, he's too young to be able to take the brutality of many upper-level battles. Perhaps as an adult he'd want to belong to a trainer.

Saurius is an example of pokemon that has other responsibilities and goals. He has friends and family, and ones that need his protection. He simply has no reason to want to be with a trainer.

And the absol says that she does not want to belong to Lucki. Responding to a pokemon clearly expressing its wishes with "oh, you're just stupid, you really do want to belong to a trainer and just don't know it" is no different than saying "that's nice, but I don't care", only with the added bonus of being insulting while you do it.

To reiterate, it is absurd for you to accuse me of extreme beliefs when you're reduced to using hyperbole to do so.

This is not directed at you. My point WAS, if there were no policies to keep trainers from abusing Pokemon, then such extreme events would be commonplace. But they are not, so clearly the Pokemon that are owned by trainers must be protected by some sort of law or code of ethics.

Actually, I was not making any statement about eating meat, merely addressing the idea that a "method" of doing something is inherently more humane than the alternative. At any rate, the "solution" is to not pack the animals into tight spaces, which is already perfectly well known. The reason the bird's beaks - which, for the record, are not like your nails but more like your hands in terms of sensitivity - are seared off is because the birds here are kept in lots with about the space of a piece of paper per bird, to maximize profit-per-area. They wouldn't be pecking each other to death if they weren't literally packed from wall to wall. Similarly, there is no reason why the sows, which are intelligent, social animals, need to be kept in total isolation their entire lives.

This happens because it is marginally cheaper to keep them in far more brutal confinement and it is not illegal, not because it is in any way necessary.

Regulated "methods" may be better than a theoretical alternative, but that doesn't mean they're automatically good in and of themselves. Don't argue something is good simply because it's regulated.

I am not saying it is good. I am saying that if there was a better way to handle the situation, wouldn't they be using it instead?

I must at this point ask if you are actually reading what I said, since this appears staggeringly irrelevant to the question.

You asked if I was willing to go without freedom, family, and risk getting beaten up. I said that I was game.

I'm deeply sorry. Unfortunately, some readers are very stupid, and if I do not make myself clear, will start to ascribe patently ridiculous opinions to me, like the idea occasional abuse refers to trainers running around with assault rifles.

I will once again state that that comment is an example of what would happen if there truly were no policies protecting Pokemon. Since obviously Pokemon are not gunned down, then such protective policies against abuse ARE in place.

And I do not appreciate being called stupid simply because my views are different or because my statements were interpreted in the wrong way.

Ah! Idiotic behavior that will make no contextual sense, because you have no reason for why they would behave that way, but are doing so solely to get back at someone who holds different opinions and who has angered you, and additionally is done without the benefit of any knowledge of actual behavior, either animal or human. Yes, that's most definitely a good way to get back at me. I really do hate badfic. You could throw in some misspellings too.

This was just a stupid, spur of the moment idea I had. And I admit that it was not well thought out. It will not come to fruition. I still do not think it is fair to make assumptions about my writing ability based on that alone.

AHAHAHAHA you're special really.

Yes. I spent an entire year writing a story just to target YOU. Because YOU are such an awesome writer. Really. Even though there was no evidence I was even aware of you until midway through, I was TOTALLY seething about your story. Because you are just SO AWESOME.

I'm just jealous, in fact, of your awesome writing. I most definitely did not leave references to the real inspirations of this scattered throughout like flameworthy easter eggs, nor do I normally avoid this forum and only read stories on FFN, because that would mean the inspiration was only from stories posted there rather than your story, which, as you've stated, is clearly not true.

In fact, I was so aiming at your story, I used my time machine to go back in time and begin posting this two months before you.

Because that is how incredibly important to me your fanfic was.

I am not saying I am special in any way. As you stated before:

I'd also like to thank the several authors whose stories were the inspiration for this one, and out of that gratitude, I'll be courteous enough not to name you.

I KNOW that I am just one of several (and probably nowhere near the best out of the bunch). I am simply using mine as an example. Notice I said, "AN obvious target," not "THE obvious target."

And though you did post this before mine, even you must admit that mine was one (OF SEVERAL, I must reiterate) that match the type you are attempting to parody to a "T." And clearly you have read enough of my story to put in your fake reviews under your "icemew" facade that you could have inserted elements from mine to parody in later chapters. Whether you did or not, in the end, readers can easily see that it is exactly the type you parodied here, especially since I reviewed here and "icemew" reviewed there. And, not to beat a dead horse, but there are several others that are better than mine that also fit this criteria.

1) You are so right that my story solely revolves around yours and are not being stupid or an egomaniac at all.

I mentioned above that this is not true. Hell, I don't even have a good literary background. I do not make any claims at all of being the best. I am simply using mine as an example.

No, some creatures just don't like being confined in near isolation for their entire lives.

Animals really are a bit smarter than people often give them credit for. And it's quite easy to test them for things like stress hormones, or to note captive animals in small cages start behaving abnormally or even injuring themselves, or that, while they don't die of starvation, they also are often sickly or suffer from what's scientifically termed "failure to thrive", and don't live out a maximum lifespan either. This varies depending, of course, on animal (unsocial ones with low intelligence tend to not care about their surroundings) and care.

Actually, battles are rarely for survival and your trite bit about herds outright laughable. Most fatal wild animal "battles" are a large animal eating a smaller one. Most interspecies competition (SUPREMACY OF THEIR HERD!!!) is, in fact, nonfatal and often accomplished without any injures at all, and many SURVIVAL!!! "battles" are nonfatal competition over food or territory. Many animals also have a behavioral equivalent of throwing in the towel, as well - dogs, for example, roll over to expose their stomachs - or will simply flee. (And virtually no animal on the face of the entire planet fights to the death over "leadership". Research. It won't hurt you.) Animals don't spend all their time ripping each other apart. Assume for a moment I might actually have some knowledge of biology, ecology and animal behavior.

You don't seem to understand what I meant, possibly because you know nothing on the subject. Animals in the wild don't spend a lot of time fighting each other. As to if an individual pokemon would rather face near constant fighting, but have a very low chance of death, or occasional fighting with a higher chance of death, it would depend on temperament and species - a short-lived prey species would probably not mind the tradeoff, while those that tend to have longer, calmer lives would.

Additionally, you're making the same mistake a lot of people make, addressed by Raiden. Battling is painful. I would not want to be injured repeatedly even if the injuries were not permanent because it's going to hurt. Some pokemon might not mind, but "it's fixed later" doesn't mean it didn't happen in the first place.

Okay, fine. Apparently you are the expert on the subject and I am just the n00b. Apparently the TV documentaries only tell half the story. I'm sorry, I can't argue that point. I concede defeat.

2) Yes, exactly My point wasn't that pokemon wouldn't willingly battle or that having those pokemon exist is wrong. It was that trying to avoid the issue by making all pokemon want to battle despite the fact that, statistically, there should be plenty that don't, is a common mistake of convenience in OT fanfiction, where things simply work out nicely for the protagonist.

By not assuming it's an either/or situation.

Wild animals raised as pets cannot be put back into the wild. It's even more impossible for domestic animals. You've made them so they can't live on their own, and you now have a responsibility to care for them.

That said, using the fact you have to take care of them and that they cannot survive on their own as justification for being able to do whatever you want with them is wrong. A pet cougar cannot be returned to the wild. This does not mean that the man who decided to keep it in his small apartment was not doing something wrong. Similarly, that a pug should be kept as a pet and not abandoned in the wild does not mean it was okay to keep a young pug around as a chew toy for a larger, more aggressive dog.

Captivity is not a catch-all term. Confining an animal in a small cage is obviously different than confining them in a large park. This isn't a simplistic right/wrong, captivity/freedom bit. If you'd take a few breaths, consider that Lucki's pokemon serve to explain the facets of the situation.

Silver is a bred pokemon who is socialized with humans and is frightened by battles. She's also a newly hatched infant. She'd like being someone's pet, especially if there were other squirtle for her to be friends with, and wouldn't mind being a contest pokemon. However, with Lucki she's been forced into situations she doesn't want, and is trapped because, by nature of her bred status, she can't leave. Even if she could run away or demand release, she has nowhere to go. In the end, Silver has had a breakdown, is clear that she is only there because she can't leave, and Lucki sends her out again. Lucki didn't create the situation Silver is in, but she took advantage of it rather than caring about Silver.

Flare has absolutely no problem with battles. He's also socialized with humans. Lucki is neglectful and emotionally abusive of him. The problem is how she treats him, not the basic situation. He would have been happy belonging to someone like the Team Magma boy, who actually wants him and would pay attention to him. Flare doesn't simply run off. He leaves for another trainer who will treat him differently.

Raiden is a child. He belongs with his family, who have been left without knowing if he's even alive, and although he doesn't mind battling itself, he's too young to be able to take the brutality of many upper-level battles. Perhaps as an adult he'd want to belong to a trainer.

Saurius is an example of pokemon that has other responsibilities and goals. He has friends and family, and ones that need his protection. He simply has no reason to want to be with a trainer.

And the absol says that she does not want to belong to Lucki. Responding to a pokemon clearly expressing its wishes with "oh, you're just stupid, you really do want to belong to a trainer and just don't know it" is no different than saying "that's nice, but I don't care", only with the added bonus of being insulting while you do it.

And yes, I must admit you have valid points here as well. Still, I am finding it much harder to differentiate my Pokemon personalities since they do not communicate by speaking. My trainer has captured several Pokemon that are currently in storage at a lab. Maybe I could work with some of them where a few are not keen on the idea of captivity.

I suppose my harsh replies were in part because of initial shock that one of my followed fics was a lie and fics that matched the genre of mine were the ones being parodied, especially since I enjoy trainer fics in general. I was also not happy with the fact that my reviews of Lucki were just part of your elaborate scheme.

But now, having some time to think with a clear mind, you've made it apparent that the author need make only small to moderate changes to remedy that situation. I am stupid for not realizing that, and I apologize for my stupidity. I think it is clear that we do have differing opinions on the whole Pokemon/Trainer relationship, but I can accept that.

Once again, I do not profess that I am a great writer. Indeed, I have much to learn, and, in your own unique and somewhat brutally honest way, you pointed out a major flaw in my (and others') writing. So, I hope that we can mutually agree that there is more than one way to interpret the Pokemon universe.

I am truly sorry if any of my debate points offended you in any way, as they were made spur of the moment and do not represent the manner in which I usually conduct myself.